二次大戰後，中間財貿易佔全球的貿易比重迅速提升，而貿易自由化也備受各國重視。然而GATT/WTO在推動全球貿易自由化上卻遭遇瓶頸。因此，各國改採FTA的方式來促進貿易自由化。 90年代初期全球興起了所謂「FTA熱潮」。然而伴隨著這股熱潮，FTA的原產地規則所產生的負面效應―「義大利麵碗」效應也接踵而至。簡單來說，「義大利麵碗」效應指的是各FTA間原產地規則的紛亂，以及對中間財流通的限制。 東亞地區素以製造業之生產分工聞名，特別是日本所建構的「東亞生產網路」。然而如同上述，東亞地區的FTA活動也產生了「東亞義大利麵碗」效應，最終限制了中間財的流通，扭曲了東亞生產分工賴以為本的「市場機制」，並且使得FTA的效益大打折扣。因此，本研究的動機即是澈底了解並具體分析義大利麵碗效應對東亞生產分工的影響。 根據本研究的整理，義大利麵碗將東亞切割成以下三個次區域(Sub-region)：東協-中國、東協-韓國、以及東協-日本。其中東協-日本由於區域整合尚未正式簽署，現階段只有六件雙邊EPA，受義大利麵碗之害更深。因此，本研究的目的在與探討義大利麵碗的解決方案。在此本文分別以「東協累積條款」、和「泛歐―地中海累積系統」，作為東協-日本層面，以及東亞整體層面的解決方案。 東協累積條款確實促進了日本與東協間的中間財流通，但由於適用貨品有限，對整體貿易影響甚微。因此及早讓東協-日本間的區域整合生效乃當務之急。另一方面，從「泛歐―地中海累積系統」的整合經驗來看，要解決東亞義大利麵碗效應，應先將原產地規則整合從區域整合的談判中分開，並利用「東協10+1」的彈性，以減低東亞原產地規則整合的難度。After the WWⅡ, the share of intermediate trade in global trade is rapidly increasing, trade liberalization thus gets more important. But the GATT/ WTO seems to reach a dead end. As a result, many countries turned their attention on FTA. In the early 90''s, a“FTA wave”was spreading. However, the“FTA wave”also had“side effect”, which was named as “Spaghetti Bowl phenomenon”. Basically, the phenomenon means two things: First, each FTA has different set of Rules of origin (Roo), and this tangled the world trade system; Second, Roo restricts the source of intermediate. In East Asia, the“FTA wave”also caused the“East Asia Spaghetti Bowl phenomenon”. The result was restricted intermediate using, and distorted the market mechanism which was the foundation of East Asia labor-division system. Therefore, to understand and realize this phenomenon more clearly and specifically is the motive of this article. “Spaghetti Bowl phenomenon” had segmentalized East Asia into three“Sub-Region”: ASEAN-China; ASEAN-Korea; ASEAN-Japan, and discussion about the solution to the phenomenon becomes the main purpose of this article. Here we take two examples as the solution: First is the “ASEAN cumulation clause”; second is the “System of Pan-Euro-Mediterranean cumulation”. “ASEAN cumulation clause”indeed stimulated the intermediate trade between ASEAN-Japan, but the applicable goods of“ASEAN cumulation clause”are very limited. Hence, bring the ASEAN-Japan integration into force as soon as possible would be a better idea. On the other hand, the experience of “System of Pan-Euro-Mediterranean cumulation”gives us an inspiration. That is separating the Harmonization of Roo from East Asia integration negotiation, and utilizes the elasticity of “ASEAN+1”